Inspection on 15/06/06 for Korniloff

This inspection was carried out on 15th June 2006.

CSCI has not published a star rating for this report, though using similar criteria we estimate that the report is Adequate. The way we rate inspection reports is consistent for all houses, though please be aware that this may be different from an official CSCI judgement.

The inspector found there to be outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report but made no statutory requirements on the home.

Other inspections for this house

Korniloff 09/09/09

Korniloff 22/07/08

Korniloff 18/01/08

Korniloff 16/01/07

Korniloff 30/09/05

Korniloff 12/04/05

Korniloff 10/11/04

Korniloff 06/05/04

Similar services:

Fairfields Country Rest Home

Poldhu

Queensmount

Trevaylor Manor

Didsbury Court Rest Home

Belma

Hunters Care Centre

Manor Lodge

Extracts from inspection reports are licensed from CQC, this page was updated on 09/07/2008.

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Korniloff Warren Road Bigbury-on-sea Kingsbridge Devon TQ7 4AZ Lead Inspector Graham Thomas Unannounced Inspection 15th June 2006 09:30 X10015.doc Version 1.40 Page 1 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to: • • • • Put the people who use social care first Improve services and stamp out bad practice Be an expert voice on social care Practise what we preach in our own organisation Reader Information Document Purpose Author Audience Further copies from Copyright Inspection Report CSCI General Public 0870 240 7535 (telephone order line) This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI www.csci.org.uk Internet address Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 2 This is a report of an inspection to assess whether services are meeting the needs of people who use them. The legal basis for conducting inspections is the Care Standards Act 2000 and the relevant National Minimum Standards for this establishment are those for Care Homes for Older People. They can be found at www.dh.gov.uk or obtained from The Stationery Office (TSO) PO Box 29, St Crispins, Duke Street, Norwich, NR3 1GN. Tel: 0870 600 5522. Online ordering: www.tso.co.uk/bookshop This report is a public document. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the prior permission of the Commission for Social Care Inspection. Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Korniloff Address Warren Road Bigbury-on-sea Kingsbridge Devon TQ7 4AZ 01548 810222 01548 810222 Telephone number Fax number Email address Provider Web address Name of registered provider(s)/company (if applicable) Name of registered manager (if applicable) Type of registration No. of places registered (if applicable) Mrs Georgina Suzanne Phillips Care Home 17 Category(ies) of Dementia (17), Old age, not falling within any registration, with number other category (17), Physical disability (17) of places Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 30th September 2005 Brief Description of the Service: Kornilloff is a care home registered to provide care for 17 older people who may also have physical disabilities or dementia. The accommodation comprises 11 single and 3 double rooms. All of the rooms are currently used as single accommodation. None has en suite facilities though one room is currently being fitted with this facility. The property is a detached three storey building with the bedrooms situated on the lower ground floor and the first floor These can be accessed by two chair lifts. There are 3 spacious lounges and a dinining room. Korniloff is situated in Bigbury on Sea and has extensive sea views. Fees for accommodation at Korniloff range from £300 to £450. Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This inspection as conducted over a period of one and a half days. Twelve service users were resident at the time of inspection. During the inspection, the Inspector spoke with 7 service users individually and others in groups. Four staff were interviewed. Three visiting relatives and a visiting friend met with the Inspector. A visiting health professional was also interviewed. The Inspector conducted a complete tour of the premises. Medication systems were examined and a sample of the homes policies and procedures were seen. A sample of service users’ records were examined as well as staff records and other documents such as correspondence and maintenance records. The Registered Provider completed a pre-inspection questionnaire. Three care workers and two service users completed questionnaires. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? A system has been introduced to review service users’ plans regularly. Safety for service users has been improved by ceasing the practice of “secondary dispensing” medication. Some staff have had training in the protection of vulnerable adults from abuse and health and safety topics. Most radiators have been covered to protect service users from the risk of burns. Tiling around the Parker bath has been repaired. Two rooms are being refurbished, one of which will have en suite facilities. Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 What they could do better: Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–6) Health and Personal Care (Standards 7-11) Daily Life and Social Activities (Standards 12-15) Complaints and Protection (Standards 16-18) Environment (Standards 19-26) Staffing (Standards 27-30) Management and Administration (Standards 31-38) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 3, 4 and 6 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users needs are adequately assessed but they do not receive adequate confirmation that the home is able to meet their needs. EVIDENCE: The files of the most recently admitted service users were examined. These contained pre-admission assessments conducted by the home and other professional assessments. However, there was no evidence that the home had confirmed, in writing, that the service users’ needs could be met. About 25 of the current staff group have a care qualification to NVQ level 2 or above. There was no evidence of systematic, comprehensive staff training in physical disability, dementia, falls and continence management all of which are relevant to the needs of service users. A visiting Continence Advisor stated that continence management in the home was generally satisfactory and her advice was usually followed. Service users’ files and discussion with service users indicated that other relevant professionals were involved when required. Various aids and adaptations were seen around the home to cater for the Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 needs of individual service users. These included walking frames. toilet frames and booster seats, handrails and so on. The Manager stated that adverts had been placed for waking night staff. The home does not admit service users solely for intermediate care. Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Health and Personal Care The intended outcomes for Standards 7 – 11 are: 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The service user’s health, personal and social care needs are set out in an individual plan of care. Service users’ health care needs are fully met. Service users, where appropriate, are responsible for their own medication, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. Service users feel they are treated with respect and their right to privacy is upheld. Service users are assured that at the time of their death, staff will treat them and their family with care, sensitivity and respect. The Commission considers Standards 7, 8, 9 and 10 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 7, 8, 9 and 10 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users receive generally adequate care but the care planning system is not sufficiently well organised or maintained. EVIDENCE: Care plans were securely stored in the home’s office in a lockable cabinet. They were held in loose-leaf document wallets with no consistent organisation and increasing the possibility of individual documents becoming mislaid or misplaced. A daily diary was also maintained for each service user. The care plans of six service users were examined. The plans contained basic details, assessments, and a photograph of the service user. Further details of health, social activity, and professional involvement were also included in the plans as well as risk assessments and reviews. Some plans contained useful specific guidance for staff (e.g. stoma care). Diet management set out in the plans was being followed by kitchen staff. Not all the records were complete or up to date. For example, the social activity records in several files showed nothing for up to two months though discussion with service users and staff suggested otherwise. In some areas the Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 plans indicated action but no evidence that this was being taken. For example, One service user’s risk assessment stated that the service user “needs to be checked regularly” However, there was no recorded evidence that this was being done. The plans contained evidence of regular review since April 2006. However, the reviews mostly indicated “no change” and lacked detail relating to specific individual need. In some instances, the review showed that needs had changed but the care plan had not been updated. For example, one review indicated that the individual “no longer needs assistance with personal care”. This contradicted the care plan which had not been updated. Individual risk management plans were not sufficiently detailed to identify the action required to minimise risk. Risk assessments did not show dates for review. Daily diaries contained repeated statements which lacked detail such as “all care given” and “no problem”. The plans did not show a clear cycle of assessment, planning, action and review. Service users and their relatives confirmed that they had routine access to general health care as required. This included optical tests, chiropody and access to the GP. Care plans and correspondence confirmed that service users were receiving specific specialist care to meet individual need. As indicated above, a visiting Continence Advisor stated that continence care in the home was generally satisfactory and that professional advice was generally followed. Weight records were seen in individual plans. Specific dietary needs identified in individual plans were known and understood by kitchen staff. The home’s system for the administration of medicines was examined. Medicines are securely stored in a dedicated room. At the time of inspection no homely remedies or controlled drugs were in use. The Manager stated that since the last inspection, staff responsible for the administration of medicines had received training. Certificates were available for scrutiny. The system for administering medicines now used by the home has eliminated the former practice of secondary dispensing noted at the last inspection. Records for the receipt, administration and return of medicines were up to date and in good order. Photographs of individual service users have been added to record sheets to decrease the risk of error. Risk assessments had not been completed for service users who administer their own medicines. Some unlabelled skin creams were found in service users’ rooms. All the service users with whom the Inspector spoke felt that they were treated with respect and that they had adequate privacy when they wished. Relatives and friends confirmed that visiting arrangements were flexible and that a warm welcome to the home was always received. Staff were seen knocking on service users’ doors and speaking with them respectfully. Preferred forms of address are recorded in individual plans and were being used by staff during the inspection. Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 are: 12. 13. 14. 15. Service users find the lifestyle experienced in the home matches their expectations and preferences, and satisfies their social, cultural, religious and recreational interests and needs. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. Service users are helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. Service users receive a wholesome appealing balanced diet in pleasing surroundings at times convenient to them. The Commission considers all of the above key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12-15 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Individual service users are offered sufficient support to pursue the lifestyle of their choice. EVIDENCE: Discussion with service users, relatives and friends confirmed that service users live a flexible lifestyle and choose whether to spend time in their own room or communal areas. Relatives and friends confirmed that visiting arrangements are flexible and that a warm welcome to the home is usual. Some service users have relatives and friends within the local village and those who are able to do so, like to go out for walks. Service users have some activities provided by external providers. Staff were also seen during the inspection organising activities such as quizzes and table top games for service users. Coffee mornings are held monthly on the premises. Recording of social / recreational activities was not kept up to date (see “Health and Personal Care” above). The inspector spoke with kitchen staff and service users about meals. Menus were examined and the kitchen was inspected. At the time of inspection, one cook was employed for three days and another was being sought for the remainder of the week. Individual dietary requirements were seen in care plans and the cook was aware of these and had an understanding of their Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 importance. Meals are taken in the home’s dining room or in individual rooms. A menu was on display in the dining room. The dining room provides pleasant and congenial surroundings. On the first day of the inspection, service users were seen taking breakfast at different times according to their individual routines. Each was offered a choice of where they took their breakfast and what they might have. Further choice is available at lunch time. This is usually the main meal or a salad or omelette. The meals seen were attractively presented and included freshly prepared and cooked ingredients. Staff were seen offering discreet assistance to service users. Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 16 - 18 are: 16. 17. 18. Service users and their relatives and friends are confident that their complaints will be listened to, taken seriously and acted upon. Service users’ legal rights are protected. Service users are protected from abuse. The Commission considers Standards 16 and 18 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 16 and 18 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users will not be sufficiently well protected from abuse until all staff have received training. EVIDENCE: The home has a complaints procedure which is accessible to service users and their relatives / friends. This includes details of how to contact the Commission directly. A complaints record is held in the home. None has been recorded since 2004. The Commission has received no complaints about the home. A policy on the protection of vulnerable adults was seen. This states that the manager should investigate if abuse is disclosed. This should be amended to conform with national and local guidance. Since the last inspection, a programme of training for staff in the protection of vulnerable adults has started. However, some staff had yet to receive this training. Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 19 – 26 are: 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Service users live in a safe, well-maintained environment. Service users have access to safe and comfortable indoor and outdoor communal facilities. Service users have sufficient and suitable lavatories and washing facilities. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. Service users’ own rooms suit their needs. Service users live in safe, comfortable bedrooms with their own possessions around them. Service users live in safe, comfortable surroundings. The home is clean, pleasant and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 19 and 26 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 19, 20, 24, 25 and 26 Quality in this outcome area is poor. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users live in generally comfortable and spacious surroundings but inadequate attention has been paid to long-standing requirements regarding the home’s environment. EVIDENCE: During this inspection the Inspector made a complete tour of the premises and examined the available maintenance records. Accommodation at Korniloff is set out over three floors with access provided by two chair lifts. On inspection, all areas of the home were clean and free from offensive odours. A large amount of communal space is available to service users. This comprises a large lounge, and additional sun lounge. A smaller TV lounge and dining room are also available. All these areas were comfortably furnished in a domestic style. One footstool with a loose leg was removed immediately when this was pointed out. Radiators have been covered since the last inspection. However, a some of maintenance issues remain unaddressed from previous inspections. The large lounge awaits redecoration. Although the carpet in this area has been taped to reduce trip hazards, it awaits replacement. Radiators in the sun lounge have yet to be connected. Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 Individual rooms were generally comfortable and decorated to a satisfactory standard. Service users individual possessions were in evidence. Outstanding issues from previous inspections include the need for individual control of radiators, a cracked hand basin in room 2 and the provision of lockable storage. The temperature of hot water to hand basins is not individually regulated and no systems are in place to reduce the risk of legionella infection. Some individual rooms have no locks whilst others are fitted with mortice locks there was no evidence in the care plans as to whether service users had been offered a key to their rooms. One room (room 7) was being refurbished and will provide en-suite facilities when complete Communal bathrooms and toilets were clean and contained liquid soap and towels. The tiling around the Parker Bath has been repaired in accordance with a previous requirement. The home’s laundry is sited away from food preparation areas. The Manager stated that the washing machine used for heavily soiled laundry had the required programming ability for hot washing. There is no sluicing facility. During the inspection, one fire exit was found to be blocked with piles of furniture. This was removed immediately when pointed out. Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 27 – 30 are: 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users’ needs are met by the numbers and skill mix of staff. Service users are in safe hands at all times. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Staff are trained and competent to do their jobs. The Commission consider all the above are key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 27 - 30 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users are not supported by sufficient numbers of experienced and trained staff to meet their individual needs at more than a basic level. EVIDENCE: Inspection of staff files and discussion with staff indicated a satisfactory recruitment process including criminal records checks. The home is staffed as follows: Mrs Phillips, the Registered Provider provides administrative support and caring cover. A new Assistant Manager has been appointed since the last inspection. There are two senior carers and a part time cook and cleaner. Staffing has been reviewed in accordance with a previous requirement. The Inspector was told by a senior carer that adverts have been placed for a replacement part-time cook / carer and a waking night carer. On the morning of the first day of the inspection the home was staffed by an experienced senior carer and two carers. One of the carers, a student, was employed temporarily during a holiday period and had no prior experience. A cook was preparing food. Only 25 of the home’s direct care staff are qualified to NVQ level 2 or above. The senior carer hols NVQ level 3 and is planning to undertake the NVQ assessors award. The new Assistant Manager holds a GNVQ in care and NVQ 2, and is planning to undertake the Registered Managers Award. The home’s policy states that each staff member will have an individual training plan. No individual plans were found in staff files. Evidence was seen of staff training in health and safety topics. However, only senior staff had received training specific to the needs of service users such as dementia, falls, Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 continence management and physical disability. A system of staff supervision was being implemented at the time of this inspection. Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 Management and Administration The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 38 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. Service users live in a home which is run and managed by a person who is fit to be in charge, of good character and able to discharge his or her responsibilities fully. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. The home is run in the best interests of service users. Service users are safeguarded by the accounting and financial procedures of the home. Service users’ financial interests are safeguarded. Staff are appropriately supervised. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping, policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users and staff are promoted and protected. The Commission considers Standards 31, 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31, 33, 35 and 38 Quality in this outcome area is poor. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The safety and welfare of service users is not adequately protected and promoted by effective management strategies. EVIDENCE: Mrs. Phillips, the Registered Provider has overall responsibility for the management of the home. Since the last inspection, a new Assistant Manager has been appointed who is planning to undertake the Registered Managers Award / NVQ level 4 in Care. In the light of numerous ongoing issues arising from inspection, a manager should be registered with the Commission who is qualified or working towards qualification. There was no available evidence of a regular systematic review of the quality of the service provided to service users. Service users financial affairs are handled by families or other representatives independent of the home. Small amounts of cash are held for individuals. Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 Records are maintained regarding the use of this cash and these were found to be up to date and in good order. Some improvements in health and safety have been made since the last inspection. However a number of issues remain outstanding. Training in health and safety topics for all staff needs to be reviewed and update training provided where necessary. The home’s fire log was incomplete and showed no fire drills since May 2005. Emergency lighting test had not been recorded since 2004. Food held in the home was found to be correctly stored and there was a record of fridge and freezer temperatures. Although the home’s policy stated that all staff handling food should receive food hygiene training, this was not the case. Staff preparing light meals in the evening had not received this training. Staff were seen wearing aprons and gloves when necessary and measures were in place for the disposal of clinical waste. The home has no sluicing facility. Most hazardous substances were securely stored when not in use and data sheets are held concerning these substances. However, detergents in the laundry were accessible to service users as the door was found open and unattended during the inspection. A system for testing and monitoring for the prevention of legionella infection has yet to be implemented. Water temperatures to individual outlets are not yet regulated. Records were seen concerning the recent maintenance / servicing of bath hoists and stair lifts. Labels on electrical equipment around the home indicated recent testing. Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Older People have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME Standard No Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 X X 2 2 X N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 2 8 2 9 2 10 3 11 x DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 X 18 2 2 2 x x x 2 2 2 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 2 28 2 29 3 30 2 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 2 x 1 X 3 X x 2 Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? Yes STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. 1 Standard OP3 Regulation 14 Requirement Timescale for action 01/08/06 2 OP7 15 3 OP9 13 4 OP18 13 Service users, and /or their representative must be informed in writing that their assessed needs can be met. (Previous timescales of 12/06/05 and 30/10/05 not met). Service users’ plans must be 31/07/06 kept up to date and reflect changes arising from reviews and risk assessments. Records must be kept of any action taken which is part of the plan The proprietor must ensure that 31/07/06 that the policies and procedures for the receipt, storage, administration and disposal of medicines comply with the guidance provided by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society, The Administration and Control of Medicines in Care Homes (2003). (Previous timescale of 30/10/05 not met).Particular attention must be paid to risk assessing self-medicating service users and the labelling of skin creams. All staff should receive training 30/09/06 in the protection of vulnerable adults. (Previous timescale of DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Korniloff Page 23 5 6 OP25 OP19 OP38 13 13 7 OP19 OP38 23 8 OP19 OP20 13 9 OP24 23 10 OP24 12 12/07/05 and 30/12/05 not met). Individual control of heating must be available in each service user’s room The registered provider must provide a plan and programme for achieving compliance with the following: Hot water outlets to baths and hand basins must be fitted with thermostatically controlled valves providing water close to 43c to prevent scalding Design solutions must be in place to ensure that water is stored at a temperature of at least 60c, distributed at 50c to prevent risk from Legionella. (Previous timescales of 12/05/05 and 30/10/05 not met). The cracked wash hand basin in Bedroom 2 and must be replaced. (Previous timescales of 31/07/05 and 30/12/05 not met). The registered provider must provide a plan and programme for achieving the following: Connect the radiators in the sun lounge Decorate the main lounge Improve the lighting in the lounge. Provide a new carpet in the lounge (Previous timescales of 12/05/05 and 30/10/05 not met). Lockable storage must be provided in service users rooms. (Previous timescale of 12/06/05 and 30/12/05 not met). Service users rooms must be fitted with locks and service users offered a key unless sufficient reasons for not offering this service are recorded in the care plan. Locks must be lockable from the inside and DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc 31/12/06 31/08/06 15/10/06 31/08/06 31/10/06 31/01/07 Korniloff Version 5.2 Page 24 11 OP4OP8 OP28 OP30 14 12 OP31 9 13 OP38 23 capable of being overridden in an emergency Staff must individually and 31/12/06 collectively have the training, skills, and experience to deliver services for people with physical disabilities and dementia. (Previous timescale of 30/12/05 not met). The registered provider must 31/12/06 commence training leading to the registered managers award or appoint a registered manager. (Previous timescale of 30/12/05 not met) The Registered Provider must 31/08/06 ensure that fire drills and equipment tests are all kept upto date and that these are recorded in the home’s fire log. RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. 1 2 Refer to Standard OP7 OP7 Good Practice Recommendations Care plans should be clearly organised in subdivided files Care plans should demonstrate a clear cycle of assessment, planning, action and review. Reviews and daily records should provide detailed information concerning specific individual needs. Consideration should be given to offering alternatives to the main meal other than salad or omelette The home’s policy concerning the protection of vulnerable adults from abuse should be amended to confirm with local and national guidance. The Registered Provider should install a sluicing facility Individual training plans should be developed for each staff member in accordance with the home’s own policy The Registered Provider should develop a system for monitoring the quality of service provided to service users. DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 3 4 5 6 7 OP15 OP18 OP26 OP38 OP30 OP33 Korniloff 8 OP38 This should be linked to an annual development plan. Staff should maintain vigilance in respect of risks to service users from potential access to hazardous substances. Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 Commission for Social Care Inspection Ashburton Office Unit D1 Linhay Business Park Ashburton TQ13 7UP National Enquiry Line: 0845 015 0120 Email: enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk Web: www.csci.org.uk © This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI Korniloff DS0000003732.V293896.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!